Friendly Atheisthttp://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist You can be skeptical and friendly at the same time.Tue, 31 Mar 2015 19:00:36 +0000en-UShourly1http://wordpress.org/?v=3.9.1Michigan High School Questioned After Christian Evangelist Speaks to Students and Invites Them to Church Eventhttp://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/03/31/michigan-high-school-questioned-after-christian-evangelist-speaks-to-students-and-invites-them-to-church-event/ http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/03/31/michigan-high-school-questioned-after-christian-evangelist-speaks-to-students-and-invites-them-to-church-event/#respondTue, 31 Mar 2015 19:00:36 +0000http://admin.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/?p=130242Bob Lenz gave a presentation at Iron Mountain High School in Michigan... which might have been okay until he used the opportunity to promote an event he was hosting at a local church later that evening. This is the flyer he gave to students:

And how did that evening event go? Well, he boasted about his conversions-to-Jesus after another (similar) event in Kansas on Facebook: ]]>On March 2, motivational speaker Bob Lenz gave a presentation at Iron Mountain High School in Michigan… which might have been okay until he used the opportunity to promote an event he was hosting at a local church later that evening. This is the flyer he gave to students:

And how did that evening event go? Well, he boasted about his conversions-to-Jesus after another (similar) event in Kansas on Facebook:

We are aware that some Christian missionaries insinuate themselves into public schools by camouflaging their purposes. It is incumbent that public officials do due diligence when approached by outside groups with vested interests in pitching their messages to a captive audience of public school students. However, in this case, it would have taken only a cursory glance at Life Promotions’ website to verify its religious agenda. It is difficult for us to understand how this event could have been approved.

FFRF is simply asking the district to promise the proselytizing won’t happen again in the future by properly vetting speakers. It’s letting them off easy given how blatant a pitch for Jesus this was.

Today, on Facebook, the author of that series came out as transgender: ]]>I’ve posted many times about The Brick Bible, which portrays biblical scenes using LEGOs:

Today, on Facebook, the author of that series came out as transgender:

I have chosen today, the Transgender Day of Visibility to officially introduce myself to the world as a transgender woman. Earlier this month my name was legally changed from Brendan Powell Smith to Elbe Spurling, and my gender legally recognized as female.

…

So, hello. I’m Elbe Spurling, a blue-haired transgender, lesbian, atheist artist and author of LEGO-illustrated religion and history books. I’m also a nice person trying to do some good in the world while I’m around.

…

I will likely continue to publish books under the name Brendan Powell Smith since it has become something of a marketable brand. Moreover, (unlike some who transition) I feel a full sense of continuity with my past identity. But in just about all other cases in my life, I will be going by my newly updated legal name and gender, and I will not be keeping my identity a secret. http://brendanpowellsmith.com/ will now redirect to http://elbespurling.com/ Thank you for your attention in this matter and for your continued fandom and support of my creative projects.

Congratulations to her. I’ve been fortunate in this movement to hear several examples of people making these kinds of revelations — young people telling their families they’re LGBT, pastors telling their congregations they’re atheists, etc. — and I’m constantly inspired by their courage. Every one of them makes it a little easier for the next person who is compelled to do the same.

Ironically, some of the commenters seem most surprised to learn that Elbe is an atheist.

We, like many of your fans, are Christians. I am so sad to hear that you are an atheist! I just want to let you know in the least condescending way possible, that I will be praying for you. And I will continue to enjoy your work!

]]>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/03/31/author-of-the-brick-bible-series-comes-out-as-transgender/feed/0Colorado Republican Loses Committee Assignment After Saying a Pregnant Woman Was Stabbed Because Abortion is Legalhttp://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/03/31/colorado-republican-loses-committee-assignment-after-saying-a-pregnant-woman-was-stabbed-because-abortion-is-legal/ http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/03/31/colorado-republican-loses-committee-assignment-after-saying-a-pregnant-woman-was-stabbed-because-abortion-is-legal/#respondTue, 31 Mar 2015 17:00:45 +0000http://admin.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/?p=130239Gordon Klingenschmitt, the fundamentalist Christian and Colorado lawmaker, is finally getting a sort of punishment following his comments last week that the brutal attack of a pregnant woman occurred because we allow legal abortions in this country.

He has now been pulled from one of the two committees on which he served: ]]>Gordon Klingenschmitt, the fundamentalist Christian and Colorado lawmaker, is finally getting a sort of punishment following his comments last week that the brutal attack of a pregnant woman occurred because we allow legal abortions in this country.

He’ll be pulled from the house health, insurance, and environment committee, but remain a member of the house local government committee.

“I was very disturbed by Representative Klingenschmitt’s comments last week and want to reiterate that his comments do not represent our caucus and he does not speak for our caucus. As House Minority Leader my ability to discipline a member of our caucus is limited. Representative Klingenschmitt’s conduct warranted his removal from the committee,” House Minority Leader Brian DelGrosso (R-Loveland) said in a statement.

Wow… when you piss off a Republican for your extreme faith-based rhetoric, you know you crossed a line.

The only reason Klingenschmitt is remaining on the other committee is because “under house rules, every member must be allowed to serve on at least one committee of reference.”

It’d be better if the pressure forced him to resign, but he has too much pride for that.

My ministry job as a chaplain and preacher on Sundays has begun to overshadow the important work of serving as your State Rep., Monday through Friday in the Capitol.

I therefore announce that I will suspend my Christian preaching ministry for the next six weeks, and I will take a Sabbatical from my television show until the end of this legislative session. We will air a few more new programs created this week, but starting next week we plan to only air TV re-runs until the end of the legislative session on May 7th.

He also added that he was suspended for quoting “unpopular Bible verses from the pulpit,” instead of saying something heartless and callous following a tragedy.

Klingenschmitt issued a half-hearted apology last week, saying he was sorry for offending anybody and apologizing for his tone, but not actually admitting he was wrong.

(Thanks to Marilyn for the link)

]]>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/03/31/colorado-republican-loses-committee-assignment-after-saying-a-pregnant-woman-was-stabbed-because-abortion-is-legal/feed/0Louisiana School District Questioned After Principal’s Promotion of Christianityhttp://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/03/31/louisiana-school-district-questioned-after-principals-promotion-of-christianity/ http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/03/31/louisiana-school-district-questioned-after-principals-promotion-of-christianity/#respondTue, 31 Mar 2015 16:00:37 +0000http://admin.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/?p=130220Exhibit 1: Principal Albert Hardison's message on the website for Walnut Hill Elementary/Middle School in Louisiana, part of the Caddo Parish Public Schools:

]]>How many religious references do we need to see from public school officials before we can all admit they’ve overstepped their bounds?

On mornings when the sun is beaming or hidden, our student prayer group, “Hornets for Hope”, pray and give thanks to the Son of God for carrying our school over the thorns of negativity and the thistles of discord and setting it gently on the petals of harmony and the lily of tranquility. Our “Hornets for Hope” thank God for giving us a school that believes in God, family, and education.

We thank God for helping us to realize that if we removed Christ, family, and teachers from the lives of our children there is no way that adding more police officers, legislating more laws, building more jails, requiring more testing, mandating more parental involvement, earning more money, or purchasing more things could ever replace the blessings of God, the love of our family, and the knowledge imparted by our teachers.

A hundred years from now it will not matter what type of house we lived in, what color our skin was, how much money we had or what brand of clothes we wore, but what will matter is that we steadfastly walked in the ways of Christ, that we honored and loved our parents, family, and fellow man and that we lived by our school motto”

Exhibit 2: A newsletter from the same school asking for prayer and quoting a Bible verse:

Exhibit 3: Another newsletter from the same school saying that a local church is sponsoring an event that all students must attend tomorrow:

Did I mention all students are expected to attend an assembly to watch this guy?

Does anyone seriously think he’s going to avoid any mentions of his God during his “positive educational message”?

Yesterday, the ACLU of Louisiana sent a letter to Dr. Theodis Lamar Goree, Jr., the Superintendent of the Caddo Parish Schools, urging him to remove the religious references from the schools’ websites and remind faculty and administration that they may not promote religion in the workplace:

There is no question that the Principal [Albert Hardison] has violated these legal mandates by repeatedly invoking God, prayer, and Christianity throughout official school publications. No school employee may tell a student what religion to practice or even to practice religion at all, nor may a school official tell students or their families to teach any religious texts. This unlawful religious coercion is improper from any school employee but it is particularly egregious coming from the school Principal, whose job is to teach and uphold, rather than violate, the legal rights of all.

Note that the ACLU didn’t even mention the athletes’ shirts or Exhibit 3 above. Or the mention of God by another principal in the district.

Still, these are just the most egregious examples and it’s hard to see how the Superintendent can defend any of it. Ball’s in his court now.

]]>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/03/31/louisiana-school-district-questioned-after-principals-promotion-of-christianity/feed/0For Reasons That Make No Sense, the Supreme Court Has Let Stand NYC’s Ban on Worship Services in Public Schoolshttp://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/03/31/for-reasons-that-make-no-sense-the-supreme-court-has-let-stand-nycs-ban-on-worship-services-in-public-schools/ http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/03/31/for-reasons-that-make-no-sense-the-supreme-court-has-let-stand-nycs-ban-on-worship-services-in-public-schools/#respondTue, 31 Mar 2015 14:00:13 +0000http://admin.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/?p=130229Bronx Household of Faith (an urban church) filled out an application to rent out space at a New York City public school for its Sunday morning services. Their application was rejected because of something now known as "Standard Operating Procedure" (SOP) §5.11.

No outside organization or group may be allowed to conduct religious services or religious instruction on school premises after school. However, the use of school premises by outside organizations or groups after school for the purpose of discussing religious material or material which contains a religious viewpoint or for distributing such material is permissible.

So it was okay for groups to rent out the space to teach kids about religion... but if it became too church-like, that was a no-no? (What was the difference? Saying "Amen"?)At one point, in 2001, the Supreme Court ruled in Good News Club v. Milford Central School that it was unconstitutional for a public school district to exclude groups like the GNC, which taught religion to children through memorizing Bible verses and singing songs and teaching them they will burn in hell for eternity if they don't accept Jesus into their lives. ]]>In 1994, the Bronx Household of Faith (an urban church) filled out an application to rent out space at a New York City public school for its Sunday morning services. Their application was rejected because of something now known as “Standard Operating Procedure” (SOP) §5.11.

No outside organization or group may be allowed to conduct religious services or religious instruction on school premises after school. However, the use of school premises by outside organizations or groups after school for the purpose of discussing religious material or material which contains a religious viewpoint or for distributing such material is permissible.

So it was okay for groups to rent out the space to teach kids about religion… but if it became too church-like, that was a no-no? (What was the difference? Saying “Amen”?)

At one point, in 2001, the Supreme Court ruled in Good News Club v. Milford Central School that it was unconstitutional for a public school district to exclude groups like the GNC, which taught religion to children through memorizing Bible verses and singing songs and teaching them they will burn in hell for eternity if they don’t accept Jesus into their lives.

With that decision in their back pocket, the Bronx Household of Faith applied once again to rent out space at a public school… and once again, they were rejected. The reason? The Good News Club wasn’t “worship.” The BHF was. The law still wouldn’t allow for it.

The minor distinction between Christian groups meeting and Christian churches worshiping aside, the judges had reasons for not wanting to allow worship services in the space:

The churches “tend to dominate the schools on the day they use them,” leading to a confusing situation for children who might believe the school was somehow a church, they added.

In addition, the churches were not equally open to every member of the public, the judges wrote. Bronx Household, for example, had acknowledged to the court that it excluded people from full participation in its services if they were not baptized, were excommunicated, or if they “advocate the Islamic religion,” the opinion said.

If they’re paying fair rental price for the space, I have a hard time understanding why a child’s confusion about what’s going on matters. It’s outside of the school day. Many public schools in other states allow churches to rent out space on weekends without a problem; why is it any different in New York? As for the argument that these meetings aren’t open to the general public, keep in mind they’re also not school-sponsored events.

Last year, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled that New York City could still prevent religious groups from renting out space in public schools for worship services.

Religions that conduct religious worship services are not excluded by Reg. I.Q. [the Department of Education’s policy] from the use of school facilities. They may use the facilities to teach religion, read from and discuss the Bible, advocate their religious views, sing hymns, say prayers, and do all things that must be permitted under the rule of Good News Club. Such religions, it is true, may not use the school facilities for the conduct of religious worship services.

You can discuss the Bible, sing, pray, and advocate your religious views… but no religious worship!

(While you’re at it, feel free to add, subtract, divide, and multiply, but don’t you dare do any of your math homework…)

I’m a strong advocate of church/state separation, but the idea that a church renting out space from a public school on a Sunday sends a confusing message to children (who aren’t even there) is ridiculous. It’s not like the schools are promoting these churches. They’re not excluding groups from renting out the space, either.

A regulation that bans worship services but not worship in any of its manifestations is thus not sufficiently tailored to accomplish the interest that the School Board has advanced, namely, avoiding the risk of being perceived as establishing religion.

I couldn’t agree more. If you’re afraid that someone will perceive the school as a church, then renting out the space to groups that promote particular beliefs and sing, pray, and read Bible verses seems extremely hypocritical.

The distinction between allowing those things and allowing “worship” is so razor-thin that I can’t understand why anyone would raise a fuss about it. Walker also had this worthwhile passage in his dissent:

Of the fifty largest school districts in the United States, New York City alone entirely excludes religious worship from its facilities… It is striking that none of these other school districts appear to have the slightest concern about violating the Establishment Clause, nor have any of their community use policies been found to violate the Clause.”

“I stand by my belief that a faith organization playing by the same rules as any community nonprofit deserves access. You know, they have to go through the same application process, wait their turn for space, pay the same rent. But I think they deserve access. They play a very, very important role in terms of providing social services and other important community services, and I think they deserve that right.”

Yesterday, in an unfortunate decision, the Supreme Court declined to hear this case, letting the previous ruling stand. Mayor de Blasio will likely take action on his end to allow the religious groups to meet in schools anyway:

The decision permits Mayor Bill de Blasio to expel immediately dozens of religious organizations that have been holding worship services in city school buildings after hours and on weekends. But consistent with a pledge the mayor made during his campaign to lift the prohibition, a spokesman said on Monday that the city remained committed to allowing churches to use the schools on the same grounds as other organizations.

Unless the law changes, though, a future mayor could reverse whatever de Blasio allows.

There are plenty of examples of public schools actively promoting religion. That’s a real problem. But allowing groups to rent out space on weekends, with no special discounts for churches or bans on non-traditional organizations, isn’t a violation of the law. It’s not often I side with conservatives on church/state issues, but without evidence of any wrong-doing on the side of the schools and churches, I don’t see any reason to be against them.

(Large portions of this post were published earlier)

]]>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/03/31/for-reasons-that-make-no-sense-the-supreme-court-has-let-stand-nycs-ban-on-worship-services-in-public-schools/feed/0Reversible Abortions? New Arizona Law Requires Physicians to Tell Patients It’s Possiblehttp://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/03/31/reversible-abortions-new-arizona-law-requires-physicians-to-tell-patients-its-possible/ http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/03/31/reversible-abortions-new-arizona-law-requires-physicians-to-tell-patients-its-possible/#respondTue, 31 Mar 2015 12:00:03 +0000http://admin.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/?p=130197Governor Doug Ducey signed SB 1318, a bill whose support is almost entirely partisan (yup, from the party that hates, hates, hates government regulation) and restricts abortion coverage in insurance plans.Oh, and it also includes an amendment to the state's informed consent laws to tell women about abortion reversals:

The law requires a health care professional to tell women at least 24 hours before they obtain an abortion:

(h) It may be possible to reverse the effects of a medication abortion if the woman changes her mind but that time is of the essence.(i) Information on and assistance with reversing the effects of a medication abortion is available on the department of health services' website.

]]>Yesterday, Arizona Governor Doug Ducey signed SB 1318, a bill whose support is almost entirely partisan (yup, from the party that hates, hates, hates government regulation) and restricts abortion coverage in insurance plans.

The law requires a health care professional to tell women at least 24 hours before they obtain an abortion:

(h) It may be possible to reverse the effects of a medication abortion if the woman changes her mind but that time is of the essence.

(i) Information on and assistance with reversing the effects of a medication abortion is available on the department of health services’ website.

Now, if it were actually possible to reverse an abortion, obviously this be pertinent information that should be shared with the person considering the procedure. The problem is, of course, that this is a load of hooey.

So-called “abortion reversal” involves injecting the hormone progesterone into a patient after she has taken mifepristone, the first dose in the two-part process to terminate a first-trimester pregnancy with medication. This reversal procedure was pioneered by an anti-abortion doctor named George Delgado, who claims that his progesterone method has helped four women who initially took mifepristone go on to have healthy live births.

…

But medical professionals say there’s no scientific evidence to suggest the hormonal injection is effectively reversing the effects of mifepristone. It takes two different medications to end a pregnancy, and mifepristone is not always effective on its own.

“There’s no evidence of any demonstrable effect of the ‘treatment’ these anti-abortion centers are marketing,” Dr. Cheryl Chastine, an abortion provider in Kansas, told reporter Robin Marty earlier this month. “The medical literature is quite clear that mifepristone on its own is only about 50 percent effective at ending a pregnancy. That means that even if these doctors were to offer a large dose of purple Skittles, they’d appear to have ‘worked’ to ‘save’ the pregnancy about half the time.”

Pretending that there is a “reversal” to abortion when there is not is not informing patients; it is misinforming patients. Skipping the second step, misoprostol, may result in a live birth, and it may not. That’s not a reversal procedure, and forcing physicians to claim that such a procedure exists could lead to an unreasonable expectation of effectiveness in the patient. If someone is wavering between aborting or not (presumably, the person intended to benefit from this misinformation), talking about snake oil “cures” for abortion is not going to help her make a grounded, reality-based decision.

Women who get abortions are often represented in anti-abortion circles as uncertain, misguided, frightened and/or manipulated into the choice. Which, while serving to infantilize women, is probably still more well-intentioned than the competing evil, sex-crazed baby-killers meme. But, if you really think most women go into the abortion clinic full of doubts and leave full of regrets… wouldn’t lying about a reversal be a counterproductive strategy? After all, if you believe a woman doesn’t really want an abortion and only thinks she does, it seems that telling her that there’s a medical procedure to help her if she changes her mind mid-abortion might give her a false sense of security: it’s okay to start the process even if I’m not sure, because they can always “reverse” it.

On the contrary, it seems that knowing that taking that pill is pretty final, that her best hope for continuing the pregnancy after that is that the first dose didn’t fully work, might encourage the doubting patient to hold off until she’s made up her mind one way or the other.

Jerry soon realized he no longer believed what he had been saying from the pulpit for nearly 25 years. ]]>Our latest podcast guest is Jerry DeWitt, a Pentecostal preacher from Louisiana whose faith began cracking a few years ago.

Jerry soon realized he no longer believed what he had been saying from the pulpit for nearly 25 years.

When he finally declared — publicly — that he was an atheist, his life began to fall apart. He wrote about his deconversion in his book Hope After Faith. You may have also seen him in the recent CNN special “Atheists: Inside the World of Non-Believers.”

Hemant spoke with Jerry recently about what led him to initially doubt his religious beliefs, his journey through the Clergy Project, and how he can still get himself into “preacher mode” when speaking.

(Jessica will return to the show in a couple of weeks!)

We’d love to hear your thoughts on the podcast. If you have any suggestions for people we should chat with, please leave them in the comments, too.

]]>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/03/30/friendly-atheist-podcast-episode-48-jerry-dewitt-pentecostal-preacher-turned-outspoken-atheist/feed/0The Deleted Blog Posts of Raif Badawi, Who Faces Death for “Insulting Islam,” Will Be Published in a New Bookhttp://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/03/30/the-deleted-blog-posts-of-raif-badawi-who-faces-death-for-insulting-islam-will-be-published-in-a-new-book/ http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/03/30/the-deleted-blog-posts-of-raif-badawi-who-faces-death-for-insulting-islam-will-be-published-in-a-new-book/#respondMon, 30 Mar 2015 22:00:18 +0000http://admin.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/?p=130180Raif Badawi. He received 50 lashes of a 1,000-lashes punishment for "insulting Islam," though the flogging has been indefinitely delayed. He currently faces a re-trial that could result in a death sentence if Badawi is found guilty.Now, a collection of the blog posts that got Badawi in trouble is set to hit German bookstores.

]]>We still don’t know the fate of Saudi blogger Raif Badawi. He received 50 lashes of a 1,000-lashes punishment for “insulting Islam,” though the flogging has been indefinitely delayed. He currently faces a re-trial that could result in a death sentence if Badawi is found guilty.

Now, a collection of the blog posts that got Badawi in trouble is set to hit German bookstores.

The book includes a section Badawi wrote about his time in prison (so far), in which he says “All this cruel suffering [happened] because I have expressed my opinion.”

Proceeds will go to benefit Badawi.

]]>http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/03/30/the-deleted-blog-posts-of-raif-badawi-who-faces-death-for-insulting-islam-will-be-published-in-a-new-book/feed/0Atheists Who Attended a School’s “Good News Club” Meeting Respond to a Volunteer’s Concerns About Their Reportinghttp://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/03/30/atheists-who-attended-a-schools-good-news-club-meeting-respond-to-a-volunteers-concerns-about-their-reporting/ http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/03/30/atheists-who-attended-a-schools-good-news-club-meeting-respond-to-a-volunteers-concerns-about-their-reporting/#respondMon, 30 Mar 2015 19:00:55 +0000http://admin.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/?p=130166I posted about how some atheists who had started a "Young Skeptics" group had gone to a meeting of a local elementary school's Good News Club -- a Christian group -- to find out what exactly was being taught to children.

Referring to the doctrine of eternal torture if you don't accept Christ in your life, the atheists were concerned that the GNC's teachings were "intimidating to children, which was a violation of the district’s facilities use policy." They were also concerned when one of the GNC group's leaders told them they were not using the (parent organization) Child Evangelism Fellowship's approved curriculum, which turned out to be inaccurate.One of the comments underneath that post was made by "Holly," who wrote:

As a volunteer for the GNC group at this school, I can tell you that this is greatly exaggerated. For instance, [atheists] Dan Courtney or Kevin Davis didn't mention that the leader of the Young Skeptics Club was told to remain a certain distance from one of the volunteers, because he had gotten overly aggressive. Why were the police called? Because strangers were taking pictures of our kids. If it were any other community club, the men coming in and taking pictures would be met with ire. Imagine if it was your daughter's ballet class and a group of men came in and just started taking pictures? You might call the police, too.As for the "lying," that, too is really exaggerated. The person who was asked if the GNC club used CES curriculum likely didn't know what CES was, and probably said, "We use our own curriculum" meaning, the Good News Club's curriculum. There was absolutely no intention to deceive. Actually, it's quite obvious the GNC uses the CES curriculum -- anyone who went to CES's website and then observed our club would be able to tell. Now, perhaps the GNC leaders should be better apprised of where the teaching sources come from, but since only one or two people are in charge of teaching, not all the volunteers are aware of the connection between CES and GNC.This video and Kevin Davis's version of the events that occurred are so over-the-top, my liberal, ACLU atheist friend was appalled. Please read my blog for the other side of the story. Dissenting comments are fine, but hateful comments won't be published. The link is [here].I understand the hate for religion runs deep among some atheists, but what's been written here is simply false.Hemant, I'm actually a longtime reader of your blog, and will continue reading, but I hope when you receive a one-sided story, you won't present it as "gospel truth." No pun intended.

Those are some serious charges, so I asked Kevin Davis for a response. ]]>Yesterday, I posted about how some atheists who had started a “Young Skeptics” group had gone to a meeting of a local elementary school’s Good News Club — a Christian group — to find out what exactly was being taught to children.

Referring to the doctrine of eternal torture if you don’t accept Christ in your life, the atheists were concerned that the GNC’s teachings were “intimidating to children, which was a violation of the district’s facilities use policy.” They were also concerned when one of the GNC group’s leaders told them they were not using the (parent organization) Child Evangelism Fellowship’s approved curriculum, which turned out to be inaccurate.

One of the comments underneath that post was made by “Holly,” who wrote:

As a volunteer for the GNC group at this school, I can tell you that this is greatly exaggerated. For instance, [atheists] Dan Courtney or Kevin Davis didn’t mention that the leader of the Young Skeptics Club was told to remain a certain distance from one of the volunteers, because he had gotten overly aggressive. Why were the police called? Because strangers were taking pictures of our kids. If it were any other community club, the men coming in and taking pictures would be met with ire. Imagine if it was your daughter’s ballet class and a group of men came in and just started taking pictures? You might call the police, too.

As for the “lying,” that, too is really exaggerated. The person who was asked if the GNC club used CES curriculum likely didn’t know what CES was, and probably said, “We use our own curriculum” meaning, the Good News Club’s curriculum. There was absolutely no intention to deceive. Actually, it’s quite obvious the GNC uses the CES curriculum — anyone who went to CES’s website and then observed our club would be able to tell. Now, perhaps the GNC leaders should be better apprised of where the teaching sources come from, but since only one or two people are in charge of teaching, not all the volunteers are aware of the connection between CES and GNC.

This video and Kevin Davis’s version of the events that occurred are so over-the-top, my liberal, ACLU atheist friend was appalled. Please read my blog for the other side of the story. Dissenting comments are fine, but hateful comments won’t be published. The link is [here].

I understand the hate for religion runs deep among some atheists, but what’s been written here is simply false.

Hemant, I’m actually a longtime reader of your blog, and will continue reading, but I hope when you receive a one-sided story, you won’t present it as “gospel truth.” No pun intended.

Those are some serious charges, so I asked Kevin Davis for a response.

What about the claim that a leader of the Young Skeptics Club was told to remain a certain distance from one of the volunteers, because he had gotten overly aggressive?

Davis wrote:

The leaders of Young Skeptics are Dan Courtney, myself, and Bill Courtney. None of us have ever been told to remain a certain distance from anyone, nor have we ever been aggressive with anyone from the GNC. The only thing I can think of regarding Holly’s unfounded remark, is that after one of the sessions, when all of the kids and parents had left, one of the visitors (not anyone affiliated with Young Skeptics) asked to speak with one of the presenters of the GNC because he wanted to discuss an assertion she made to the young children attending the meeting.

When introducing the Bible lesson for the day, she prefaced it by asking the kids, “What is different about stories from the Bible?” The kids, showing that this is obviously a routine question asked at every meeting to solidify what’s being conveyed, responded in unison “They’re all true.” Then she said, “That’s right, children. And how do we know they’re all true?” They again responded collectively, “Because God never lies.”

So the observer, being college educated in the field of religious studies, wanted to have a dialogue with the presenter to express his concerns that children were being told that everything in the Bible is absolutely true — an extremely fundamentalist view of the Bible that a very small percentage of Christians agree with — rather than teaching them that this is what the presenter believes to be true, or this is what Christians believe.

It’s quite likely that most of the parents of these kids don’t think 100% of the Bible is true. Teaching 7 year old children that something only a small group of fundamentalists believe is not simply “teaching lessons from the Bible.” It’s teaching fundamentalism, and that’s not only contrary to the science education they’ll receive, it’s dangerous. Despite Holly’s claim, their conversation never got heated or aggressive, and no voices were raised.

Dan Courtney added: “The monitoring of the Good News Club is conducted by community volunteers, and there is no affiliation with the Young Skeptics.”

What about the claim that the police were called because pictures were being taken of the children?

Davis wrote:

No. The police were called by the NY State Director of CEF because the visitors refused to sign the form that is shown in Dan Courtney’s video.

He threatened to call the police as a way to get his form signed. It didn’t work. So he called the police and the police agreed that the meetings are to be open to the public, since they’re on public property and the district policy states just that. And since the visitors WERE NOT being disruptive, there was no reason for the police to remove anyone, much less be called in the first place.

As for pictures being taken, we are not interested in taking pictures of anyone’s kids. Any pictures that were taken were of volunteers giving lessons. If there were kids in the pictures, then most likely it was the backs of their heads and was incidental. In fact, no one ever asked us not to take pictures until the Director showed up with his silly contract (which said we could be kicked out if we even take out a cell phone), which had nothing to do with kids; it said no pictures, video, or audio recording at all.

If photos were really a concern, then the meetings could easily be moved to private property such as a church. There’s an idea — religious instruction in a church, not a public school. Yes, if a bunch of men came into my daughter’s ballet class, I’d call the police, because the class is on private property and not open to the public. Apples and oranges.

For the record, the people who have come to observe have been men AND women, and have not taken many pictures at all, despite Holly painting us to be a bunch of shutter-happy creepy guys trying to get kiddie pics. There have been more pictures taken of us than there have been the other way around.

Courtney added: “The previous month when a single volunteer (a woman from the community) attempted to attend the GNC, she was barred completely. It’s abundantly clear that our mere presence at the club was the issue, and that calling the police was part of the intimidation tactics to keep us out.”

What about the person who didn’t know what curriculum was being used?

I’ll assume she means CEF. Holly starts out her response by saying she’s a volunteer for GNC. While not saying what kind of volunteer, she says in her personal blog that she just recently volunteered to hand out snacks. I assure you that the district superintendent did not call a snack person to ask about curriculum. They called the leadership of the GNC, who by the way must sign CEF’s Doctrinal Protection Policy & Worker’s Compliance Agreement in order to run the club.

Aside from that, it even says on the Good News Club permission slip that they’re run by Child Evangelism Fellowship. So I’m absolutely certain the individuals who were asked about the curriculum know exactly who CEF is and what they were being asked. Holly’s statement regarding this is pure conjecture and again, totally unfounded. I’m fairly certain the CEF/GNC would not want her to act as their spokesperson regarding this incident.

Courtney added:

… the reply relayed to me though the Superintendent’s office was not “we don’t know what ‘CEF’ is”, but rather a flat denial that they were using CEF’s curriculum.

To the claim that even a liberal atheist friend was appalled by Davis’ version of events:

There is nothing in my report or the video that is false or that did not happen. I won’t rehash it. If Holly would like to expound upon what she feels is over the top or inaccurate, she can feel free. If you’d like to see first hand what types of complaints people have about the GNC and CEF, just search “good news club abuse” on YouTube or read Katherine Stewart’s book. I’ve done both.

Holly wrote that “what’s been written here is simply false.” Davis responded:

Again, nothing I wrote was false and Holly hasn’t shown anything to be as such. If Holly was being completely honest in her comment, she would have presented herself as a volunteer to hand out snacks, instead of omitting that part and simply saying “volunteer” which presents her to be some sort of authority on what happened here.

Let’s be clear. Those of us who oppose the GNC (specifically the leaders of Young Skeptics) are not opposed to religious instruction. There are some Bible stories that do a fantastic job of teaching morality, compassion, and humanitarianism. We are opposed specifically to the methods used by CEF through Good News Clubs.

Teaching children, who inherently believe what they’re told by adults inside the walls of a school, that they’re fundamentally flawed, deserving of death, and can never be fixed unless they dedicate their lives to Jesus, is predatory and abusive. Stripping down a child’s self worth in order to build it up again by selling them your version of the cure is, while obviously effective, unethical to anyone who can look at the process objectively and has any empathy for innocent children. Asking a child to commit their lives to a deity when they are still learning basic math skills is vastly inappropriate. Half of them still want to be cowboys and princesses and you’re asking them to say the Prayer of Salvation or suffer the eternal consequences. It’s horrific. How many life choices did you make when you were 7?

Holly, you’re welcome to attend any Young Skeptics meeting you’d like, and you can take as many pictures as you want. We won’t make you sign a contract, and we probably won’t even call the police. And if you miss any, we record them all and post them on our YouTube channel. Unlike the Good News Club, we’re not hiding anything and have no reason to.

On a personal note, I would say that I understand the concern when people you don’t know attend a gathering of children, even for a school club, but I think the atheists are following the policy provided by the district. I also think they’re raising an important concern — that the unwritten goal of these Good News Clubs is to indoctrinate children with a fundamentalist Christian view of the world before they’re old enough to ask critical questions or challenge what they’re being taught.

Why not record meetings and post them online as the Young Skeptics group does?

Why not make the full curriculum public? (Even the lessons that are publicly available are horrific, telling kids who “complain about the meals [their] mom or dad cooks” that they “have earned God’s punishment for sin, which is spiritual death… That means… never going to Heaven.”)

Why not be honest about how children are being taught that the punishment for not accepting Christ’s divinity is torture in the afterlife?

This isn’t about “hate for religion.” It’s about our shared concern for the well-being of children. The atheists here feel like what’s being taught to kids is psychologically damaging, and it’s even more worrisome when the GNC is tied to a public school as opposed to a church.

As the saying goes, sunlight is the best disinfectant. If the GNC believes they’re doing everything right, they have nothing to worry about when accounts of their public meetings are indeed made public.